1 / 29

Charles N. Alpers, Ph.D. U.S. Geological Survey California Water Science Center Placer Hall

Mercury Contamination and Bioaccumulation from Historical Gold Mining in the Sierra Nevada – Site Characterization and Remediation. Charles N. Alpers, Ph.D. U.S. Geological Survey California Water Science Center Placer Hall 6000 J Street Sacramento, CA. Cooperating Agencies. Federal State

winda
Download Presentation

Charles N. Alpers, Ph.D. U.S. Geological Survey California Water Science Center Placer Hall

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Mercury Contamination and Bioaccumulation from Historical Gold Mining in the Sierra Nevada – Site Characterization and Remediation Charles N. Alpers, Ph.D. U.S. Geological Survey California Water Science Center Placer Hall 6000 J Street Sacramento, CA

  2. Cooperating Agencies Federal State Local Hydraulic mining, Placer County, CA

  3. Outline of Presentation • Background • Review of mining history and mercury use in gold mining • Environmental geochemistry of mercury in the Bear, Yuba, and American River watersheds, California • Water Quality • Sediment • Biota • Importance of seasonality in Hg cycle • Remediation of 3 Hg-contaminated placer mine sites • What have we learned? • What information gaps remain? Casci Creek, Nevada Co., CA

  4. HISTORICAL MINING: Gold & Mercury box • More than 100,000,000 kg mercury (Hg) produced from 239 mines in California • Approx. 33,000,000 kg Hg lost to atmosphere from furnaces at Hg mines • Approx. 12,000,000 kg Hg used in Calif. gold mining (Churchill, 2000) USGS Fact Sheet 2005-3014

  5. GOLD MINING AND MERCURY USE IN THE NORTHERN SIERRA NEVADA • Highest intensity of hydraulic mining (placer gravel deposits) in Bear-Yuba watersheds • Approx. 5,000,000 kg of mercury lost during gold processing in Sierra Nevada (USGS, 2000; Churchill, 2000) • Significant gold dredging in all rivers draining Sierra Nevada USGS Fact Sheet 2005-3014

  6. Hydraulic mining, Malakoff Diggins, Nevada County, CA, circa 1880 Hydraulic mine, ground sluice system, Scott Valley mine, Siskiyou County, CA circa 1870s

  7. Sluice Tunnels • Sluices recovered gold. • Mercury was used to amalgamate fine gold. • Mercury was lost during sluicing. • Mercury is still found in sluices and their foundations today. Photos: Rick Humphreys, SWRCB

  8. Sluice and undercurrent, Oro Fino mine, Siskiyou County, CA Circa 1855 SLUICE BOX UNDERCURRENT Sluice–undercurrent system, Spring Valley mine, Butte County, CA, Feather River watershed

  9. Hg beads in sediment Photo by R. Humphreys South Fork American River, Lotus Camp (near Coloma)

  10. Mercury Loss to the Environment in Hydraulic Mining USGS Fact Sheet 2005-3014

  11. Cleaning amalgam from stamp mill, Empire Mine, Nevada County, California, 1900

  12. Abandoned bucket-line dredge, Yuba Goldfields, CA

  13. TRANSPORT AND TRANSFORMATIONOF MERCURY ENVIRONMENTS: • Hydraulic and hardrock gold mines – Sierra Nevada • Mercury mines – Coast Ranges • Mountain streams above reservoirs • Foothill reservoirs • Rivers below reservoirs – gold dredging environments • Floodplain deposits • San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary USGS Fact Sheet 2005-3014

  14. The Mercury Cycle in Aquatic Systems Hg0 Hg(II) Hg0 atmospheric transport Particles AIR Runoff phytoplankton HgCl42- Hg(II) CH3Hg+ Hg0 HgCl2 zooplankton light light CH3Hg+ Hg(II) Hg0 microbes Particles DOM WATER microbes microbes CH3Hg+ Hg(II) Hg0 SEDIMENT abiotic rxn. SRB, FeRB Graphic: Mark Marvin-DiPasquale (USGS)

  15. SAMPLING SITES, BEAR-YUBA, 1999

  16. Source: May et al. (2000) USGS OFR 00-367

  17. Food Web Study, Camp Far West Reservoir, CA • (δ15N) − MeHg slope similar other studies • similar rate of biomagnification of MeHg with increasing trophic level. Stewart et al. (2008) CJFAS

  18. Data from: Alpers et al. (2008) USGS SIR 2006-5008 Camp Far West Reservoir, CA

  19. Data from: Alpers et al. (2008) USGS SIR 2006-5008 Camp Far West Reservoir, CA

  20. Camp Far West Reservoir, CA Stewart et al. (2008) CJFAS

  21. Principal Findings – Seasonal Cycles in Camp Far West Reservoir • Fall-Winter phytoplankton bloom is triggered by phosphorus in inflowing water • Spring is the key season for zooplankton growth and MeHg bioaccumulation • Mass load of MeHg inflow exceeds in-reservoir production (benthic flux and hypolimnion) • MeHg bioaccumulation in upper trophic levels (fish, invertebrates) dependent on MeHg uptake in plankton, which have strong seasonal cycles

  22. DW = Drinking water std. AL = Aquatic life std. (CTR) DW DW AL Source: Alpers et al. (2005) USGS SIR 2004-5251 AL DW

  23. Total mercury in sediment Boston Mine Source: Alpers et al. (2005) USGS SIR 2004-5251

  24. Remediation ofmercury-contaminated placer gold mines • 2000: Polar Star Tunnel, Dutch Flat Mining District (USEPA), $1.4M, 150 m tunnel (~$9K/m) • 2003: Sailor Flat Tunnel, Tom and Jerry Mining District (USFS), $300K, 130 m tunnel (~$2K/m) • 2006: Boston Mine Tunnel, Red Dog Mining District (BLM), $250K, 60 m tunnel (~$4K/m)

  25. Clean-up Scenes – Polar Star Tunnel Stabilizing the entrance Mercury vapor monitoring Photos: R. Humphreys, SWRCB Finished product Washing the floor

  26. Clean-up Scenes – Sailor Flat Tunnel before excavation Tunnel and pit areas restored Tunnel during excavation Photos: R. Humpheys, SWRCB

  27. Clean-up Scenes – Boston Mine Trommel and concentrator bowl Photos: R. Humphreys, SWRCB Tunnel outlet During remediation Spiral concentrator Slusher Panning mercury

  28. What have we learned? • Mercury “hot spots” occur in Sierra Nevada • Tunnels and ground sluices at hydraulic mines • Stamp mill sites (and downstream) at lode mines • From limited post-remediation monitoring: • At Polar Star and Boston mine tunnels, persistent contamination from upstream sources • Difficult to demonstrate benefits of remediation • Bioaccumulation depends on seasonal dynamics involving food web • Critical to sample seasonally for water and biota

  29. What information gaps remain? • Baseline data on Hg and MeHg loads in mining-affected watersheds • Quantify potential benefits from mine remediation • Seasonal variability • Information needed for TMDLs • Data on Hg and MeHg in reservoir sediments • Dam removal issues • Potential sites for Hg removal, sand-gravel-gold extraction • Studies of Hg methylation and bioaccumulation • Controls on what makes reactive Hg(II) available to microbes • Controls on microbial methylation: S, C, Fe, nutrients • Food web studies • Effects of wetland restoration, wet/dry cycles • Effects of agricultural amendments (esp. S on rice and other crops) • Wildlife health effects • Effects of MeHg exposure on salmon and steelhead • Very little information on mammals, reptiles, many bird species • Modeling of mercury cycling in rivers and reservoirs • Improved understanding of biogeochemical and hydrologic processes • Management tools for testing scenarios, confirming results

More Related